1. The technique is invariably more effective and dramatic when working with
a phantom arm rather than leg. Where there is a below knee amputation, success
is usually greater than with an above knee amputation.

2. Where sensory
remapping occurs, i.e. stimulation to the corresponding cheek,
neck and throat elicit sensation in the phantom hand/forearm, the mirror
box approach is invariably successful. Where no remapping occurs, results
are less significant. I have no idea why this should be the case.

3. Where the
pain is caused by nerve pain or stump pain, the mirror box is of no benefit.

4. Therapists
using the mirror box find it doesnt work primarily for a very simple
reason  they dont set things up appropriately. For example,
one chap with an amputation of left arm at shoulder level following brachial
plexus injury had the problem that the phantom arm was twisted up behind
his back. At this point there is no value in using the mirror box. First
we had to manipulate the phantom into a position whereby it was in front
of him so that it could be placed into the box. Another guy, having manipulated
the phantom into the right position found no benefit from the mirror until
we removed his wrist watch from his remaining wrist. The illusion needs
to be total.

5.
At the point the `effect` occurs with the mirror, there is usually an overwhelming
release of emotion that is not unpleasant. After this initial effect, the
person feels pleasantly different. This emotional state does not recur with
subsequent sessions with the mirror box.

6. Success vastly
increases where the client approaches the box with their remaining arm already
in a mirror-position to that of the phantom. I think this is the problem
that occurs when working with phantom legs, where often the phantom is a
different length to that of the remaining limb.

Id be interested
to hear of any other experiences people have with the technique, both successful
and otherwise. Eventually I hope to collate the data and present it on the
website in due course.